Huntster Posted February 11, 2019 Posted February 11, 2019 20 hours ago, NathanFooter said: .........Q 3 & 4: Investigators have freedom in the cases they take on and leadership does not ( from what I have seen ) step in and take over. The investigator can request to partner with ranking members for assistance in a case......... How are reports assigned to individual investigators? Do you have access to reports online as they come in daily, see one you like, and assign yourself to it? First come, first served? And if you assign yourself to a cade, and if another investigator requests involvement, can you politely refuse? Is there a seniority system in place officially or unofficially, or a priority based upon an investigators proximity tonthe report location? Can an investigator who lives in California take up cases in Washington?
SWWASAS Posted February 11, 2019 BFF Patron Posted February 11, 2019 I think the Finding BIgfoot show in many ways destroyed what organization the BFRO had. The top down management focus has always been about the defunct show and the money making expeditions. Now that Finding Bigfoot is off the air, from the outside, I have a sense that the BFRO is in trouble as an organization. I personally have met good people who I respect who are investigators. If the organization leadership is the problem, perhaps a core group of people could break off and take it a different direction?
hiflier Posted February 11, 2019 Author Posted February 11, 2019 (edited) Enter....from stage left.... the SRN Edited February 11, 2019 by hiflier
Huntster Posted February 11, 2019 Posted February 11, 2019 27 minutes ago, SWWASAS said: .......If the organization leadership is the problem, perhaps a core group of people could break off and take it a different direction? Seems to me that the original direction was nearly perfect: be a central point where people can report encounters, and be able to act on fresh reports quickly. If that is still occurring, great. If not, that's a shame, because at this point, a competing organization wouldn't do much more than dilute the reports with yet another scattered database.
SWWASAS Posted February 11, 2019 BFF Patron Posted February 11, 2019 (edited) I do not agree about the direction being perfect. The organization was not organized to run efficiently. They have a huge backlog of sighting reports and according to BFRO members it is due to lack of investigators. How do you get to be in investigator? Take a class? Then a test? (NO) Demonstrate capabilities? (well maybe) But primarily you purchase the job by spending many hundreds if not thousands of dollars on expeditions before you are tapped to join the organization. Only then can you become an investigator. It is run more like an exclusive member country club than a scientific research organization. It takes big bucks to buy your way in. According to their criteria, a scientist with the expertise of Meldrum probably would not be invited to be a member unless he attended the requisite number of expeditions first. And people like Thom Powell, who know as much about the subject as anyone, are thrown out for spouting theories not supported by the money making leadership. As far as a competing database, a data base that does not collect data for whatever reason is not much good. Edited February 11, 2019 by SWWASAS
Huntster Posted February 11, 2019 Posted February 11, 2019 44 minutes ago, SWWASAS said: I do not agree about the direction being perfect. The organization was not organized to run efficiently. ........ "Direction" and "efficiency" are two different things. I would agree that the efficiency is disastrous. But, again, standing up another such organization would just split off reports, not combine them.
Redbone Posted February 11, 2019 Posted February 11, 2019 2 hours ago, SWWASAS said: If the organization leadership is the problem, perhaps a core group of people could break off and take it a different direction? That is exactly what happened with this group, although I have no idea if leadership was the cause of the breakaway. https://www.lowlandsbigfoot.org/ These guys are all BFRO investigators (former?) and have been the Iowa BFRO expedition organizers up to this point. Now they are doing their own thing and there is no BFRO Iowa expedition this year. I've been told they have no plans for their own sightings database. Luckily, my close group of friends will organize our own private outings in Iowa locations so we no longer need the BFRO. There's also this group, where former BFRO investigator Andy Pieper is one of the leaders. http://sasquatchresearchers.org/ It's my feeling that the BFRO is slowly dying. I make a point to preserve all new reports in the web archive wayback machine in case the BFRO website disappears one day like their forum did. My own Rez Squatching group has discussed creating our own database, so we can control it. 1
NathanFooter Posted February 11, 2019 Posted February 11, 2019 7 hours ago, NCBFr said: Aren't many of the BFRO investigations are done over the phone? A good share are, I will be honest in saying that good in-depth reporting is hard to find these days. The western WA chapter often meets up with the witness and goes over the incident at the location in many cases, this is not always in the report when published for a variety of reasons.
NatFoot Posted February 11, 2019 Posted February 11, 2019 Thanks @Redbone for the link. Thought this, along with the circumstance was interesting. Don't think I've seen it before.
NathanFooter Posted February 11, 2019 Posted February 11, 2019 5 hours ago, Huntster said: How are reports assigned to individual investigators? Do you have access to reports online as they come in daily, see one you like, and assign yourself to it? First come, first served? And if you assign yourself to a cade, and if another investigator requests involvement, can you politely refuse? Is there a seniority system in place officially or unofficially, or a priority based upon an investigators proximity tonthe report location? Can an investigator who lives in California take up cases in Washington? Q 1: The investigator can either be assigned a report or assign it to themselves. Q 2 & 3: We have access to reports as they come in and can sift through them to evaluate their likelihood of credibility. It for the most part is first come first serve but we try to alert a more local investigator before assigning the report to ourselves. Q 4: Yes, an investigator that is closer can reach out to be involved if they can commit to investing their time to assist. You can refuse but it makes for bad blood. Q 5 & 6: In the WA chapter there is not a real set guideline for this but some just understand that certain areas are within another investigators jurisdiction and so they do not take the report for a week or so ( this situation can change based on the potential loss of site evidence such as print or DNA ). Q 6: Yes, you can followup on a report in another state but you are expected to actually respond and work the report. Sitting on info is frowned upon or worse. 1
Huntster Posted February 11, 2019 Posted February 11, 2019 Thanks for the answers, Nathan. I still see BFRO as the brightest star on the horizon primarily because of their exposure and reporting system. I wish I had access to fresh reports.
NatFoot Posted February 11, 2019 Posted February 11, 2019 Blows my mind that they don't have a whole lot of investigators in WA. That would be like the DNR not having many bear experts in AK.
Huntster Posted February 11, 2019 Posted February 11, 2019 47 minutes ago, NatFoot said: .......That would be like the DNR not having many bear experts in AK. Actually, there aren't many "bear experts" in ADFG in Alaska. Most Area Biologists have to be well rounded with regard to all the species in their unit. Certainly, there are and have been some bear experts who have authored bear studies. Sterling Miller, Mark Chihuly, and Larry Aumiller come to mind.
NatFoot Posted February 11, 2019 Posted February 11, 2019 1 minute ago, Huntster said: Actually, there aren't many "bear experts" in ADFG in Alaska. Most Area Biologists have to be well rounded with regard to all the species in their unit. Certainly, there are and have been some bear experts who have authored bear studies. Sterling Miller, Mark Chihuly, and Larry Aumiller come to mind. I think you got the point I was trying to make.
Huntster Posted February 11, 2019 Posted February 11, 2019 Yeah, but if you think about it, ADFG is a funded government organization, and Alaska has 75%of the North American grizzly population. You'd think ADFG would be awash in bear experts. There sure are a lot of private bear wildlife photographers, though..........
Recommended Posts